recording

[Kenny]

Here's a link to a really fab read by New Yorker music critic Alex Ross - about recordings and technology, and how they've changed music, the way we listen to it, the way it's made, the whole box of dice. Faskinating.

www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/050606crat_atlarge

[bod]

Recording Jazz: A Questionable Practice? (or, A Call for Re-examination)
by Stu Vandermark

www.okkadisk.com/article2.html

[Kenny]

I found the NYorker piece engrossing, so I posted a link here thinking others may appreciate it also, rather than just treating the thread as some sort of pissing contest and an opportunity to post a link their choice of writing. Without comment. Honestly, what a dickwit.

[bod]

and i thought the piece i posted was a decent adjunct to yours.
i don't know why that made you angry.
i enjoyed reading both.

[Iron Guts]

Chill out Kenny, both a great read full of interesting ideas. A nice way to start a sunday!

[Kenny]

Iron said:

Chill out Kenny, both a great read full of interesting ideas. A nice way to start a sunday!

OK, done. I don't what it is about Bod and his posts that gets up my nose so. Maybe I'm so used to these boards being chatty, that his post-and-split approach comes across as loftily arrogant.

Bod: Why don't you just spend a little time saying hello instead of just posting a link?

[happy]

hey kenny - great link. Really interesting article (haven't got to Bod's one yet...) One thing I was forced to disagree with:

"Records cannot be entirely to blame, he admits: otherwise, similar patterns would surface in popular music, which, whatever its problems, has never lacked for spontaneity."

Methinks the writers could use a little more familiarity with contemporary popular music, which especially in the hands of the major labels could hardly be desribed as 'spontaneous'. Hell, even going back to the 50's and 60's the vast body of pop is surely more accurately described as 'specifically organised, orchestrated and contrived to create a sublime recorded experience'. Yes, we could cite a number of exceptions in rock and punk, but all of these have now been thoroughly dumbed down into commodified units (with a few precious survivors, but even zappa and the grateful dead are gone now, eh kenny?)

The writer even briefly discusses the impact on pop earlier in the piece, but misses the point by charging on to Brian Wilson and the Beatles without mentioning Les Paul, who invented the whole multitrack process anyway.

all that said, I think its an excellent, thought provoking piece, and I learnt a bundle. I look forward to chasing up some of the books...

[happy]

The Vandermark article I found a little harder going. Interesting, but not particularly perceptive. I do find his metaphor with photography interesting. I believe that we learn to 'hear' recorded music, to really understand and comprehend it, only after we have heard a live performance of similar music (or at least music on thesame planet!). I think this applies especially to 'post-Ayler' music, as Vandermark puts it.

The point about the verité of the Parker recordings is well made too. Blessed we are that such informal recording is possible, and continues to capture live performances, good and bad, reminding us that music is actually a physical/emotional/psychological experience long before it is a critical one...we create intellectual responses to deal with how music makes us feel, not the other way around.

[happy]

The Vandermark article I found a little harder going. Interesting, but not particularly perceptive. I do find his metaphor with photography interesting. I believe that we learn to 'hear' recorded music, to really understand and comprehend it, only after we have heard a live performance of similar music (or at least music on thesame planet!). I think this applies especially to 'post-Ayler' music, as Vandermark puts it.

The point about the verité of the Parker recordings is well made too. Blessed we are that such informal recording is possible, and continues to capture live performances, good and bad, reminding us that music is actually a physical/emotional/psychological experience long before it is a critical one...we create intellectual responses to deal with how music makes us feel, not the other way around.

[Holiday Mal]

A few observations...haven't seen the forum for a while....the main point: Recordings made in studios are not the same as live performances..an obvious point but one often overlooked....Studios offer artists unique opportunities to create something that goes beyond a live gig...the focus that a studio can give to a project is something that successful recording sessions draw on...
it can range from recording straight ahead music in a high sound quality as possible, to elaborate productions using pro tools and much editing....

As the listener will be hearing the final result out of a couple of speakers, you have to 'create' the sound aspect of the performance...an important point to keep in mind is without any visual aspect, what works live often doesn't work as well recorded...length of solo's, arrangements etc....also performance dynamics...if you've been used to working with foldback (or none),
using headphones (used in most cases) takes adjusting...too loud and youre dynamics can sound week...this takes some experience to get used to..

At least recorded Jazz (in most cases) whilst using the odd edit has so far avoided the editing nightmare that hovers around your average classical session...300 plus edits is not unusual in a classical cd, using short pieces from multiple takes....in this instance recording has altered the artform to an extent..perfect cds ...

Ultimately though, however you use the studio, it does all start with performance....

thoust cannot polish a turd....

[mim]

I disagree. I get the feeling I am hearing many a polished turd whenever I turn on the radio. Although, tis true, those with experienced ears can tell the difference between a gem and a polished turd.

[Kenny]

Further ruminations on the NYer piece by David Byrne, in the June 5 installment of his journal:

www.davidbyrne.com/journal/2005-may-june.php

As for the Vandermark piece, some good points, but yup not as perceptive.

And I'm heartily tired of writers/commentators/whatever stating or implying that recording has ruined jazz or is bad for it or is somehow inferior. That may be the case for individual tastes, but in general it seems to me (as even Vandermark agrees), the two are inextricably linked.

I don't feel that I am settling for second best when I play a CD instead of going to a gig. Nope - I'm enjoying something different.